[ale] New Twiki topic LinuxInGASchools

[Charles Marcus]

> From: Mike Panetta [mailto:ahuitzot at mindspring.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 2:25 PM
>
> Let me start by saying that I think the solution to the problem is a
> custom distro..  See below...
>
>> There are a *lot* of things the implementer of *any*
>> production Linux environment must address, but that
>> doesn't mean that each app must address *all* of the
>> separate issues.

> No but who ever designs the distribution should.  Or
> at least put in place "reasonable defaults". (Whatever
> that may be).

You know Mike, you are right - except for one, tiny little detail...

LTSP IS NOT A DISTRIBUTION OF LINUX !@#$%^&*

It is simply some add-on software that provides certain functionality - like
Webmin or Apache.

This entire argument developed because one person said that this problem was
an LTSP problem - it was NEVER about whether or not some/all distros do a
poor job of configuring KDE.

sheesh.

<snip>

>>> Any LTSP-like environment that is going to actually
>>> be proposed as a solid, viable, secure, robust, and
>>> REPLICABLE solution has to have every last one of
>>> these issues addressed in its BASELINE configuration,
>>> NOT as an "I'll twiddle this and I'll twiddle that"
>>> matter but as an "this has ALREADY been designed,
>>> twiddled, and set up the way it needs to be for
>>> production use prior to installation" matter.

>> This is probably the only paragraph I disagree with
>> completely.  There is absolutely no way for the LTSP
>> developers to determine all of the possible ways people
>> mighht wanna use LTSP.  There are some things that are
>> simply the domain of the System Administrator, plain
>> and simple.

> No but there are some things that apply to the way LTSP
> is going to be used in a School environment, and thus
> can be planned for in advance and put into a default
> config that the distribution installs.

This is self-evident - but again, has no bearing on the discussion at hand.
This statement applies to *every* Linux application that goes on a Server,
under *every* circumstance and environment, *period*.

> If the sys admin for a particular school wants to change
> the defaults, then let him.  If the sys admins of all
> schools want to change all the defaults, then we
> programmed the defaults wrong and the distribution
> manager needs to change them.

Ridiculous.  This suggests that 'one-size-fits-all', and this can never be
the case.  Is there an ideal default config?  Sure - one that would require
the least amount of tweaking by the Sys Admin - but the fact is, every
environment is different, and it is impossible to create a config that would
satisfy all situations.

>> What if you install LTSP and KDE hasn't been installed
>> yet?  There are just too many variables.

> Then your not installing from a distribution, and your
> doing it the wrong way anyways. :P

Huh?  So, you're saying it isn't possible to install Redhat without KDE?
How long have you been using Linux?

>>> Receiving a litany of showstopping issues from end
>>> users and responding with "I can fix that, I'm the
>>> SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR...I can fix that, I'm the SYSTEM
>>> ADMINISTRATOR..." isn't going to make a very good
>>> impression.  The person who does the design, does the
>>> testing, finds the problems, implements the fixes,
>>> and releases working, good, solid "re-distributions"
>>> is the SYSTEM DESIGNER.

>> OK, well, lets talk semantics then.  Give me a break.
>> A *good* system administrator *also* performs the
>> functions of what you have just termed the 'System
>> 'Designer'.

> No he does not.  The distribution designer does.

Depends on what is meant by the 'I can fix that, I'm the SYSTEM
ADMINISTRATOR' snide remarks above, obviously.  If we are talking about
actual bugs in the software and tools that are installed, then yes, you are
correct.  However, I was simply talking about purely configurational issues
(like the KDM issue).

By the way, you are arguing this as if it had been proposed that we develop
a *Distribution* of Linux.  That has never been proposed.  It all started as
a simple exercise, where the use of LTSP was proposed as a simple,
manageable way to inroduce Linux into the school environment.  Jeff then
came back with an 'I don't know - LTSP looks like its got quite a few
security problems and who knows what else', based on one cited example of a
misconfigured KDM.

>> This conversation is getting more and more ridiculous.
>>
>> All I wanted to point out was that a misconfigured KDM
>> is *not* the fault of LTSP.
>
> No its not.  Its a fault of the distribution manager (in
> this case).
>
> [ Snip of everything else that is irrelevent to MY point ]

Your entire post was irrelevant to the QUESTION that was being argued -
there are thousands of different ways software can be configured.

Maybe someone *wants* anyone to be able to reboot the machine when logged on
in KDE.  In this case, that someone could then argue that the Distro was
'configured wrong' - simply meaning that it was configured wrong *for them*.

So, you cannot say that in all cases, KDM should be configured this way or
that way by default.  Would it be nice to have this be an option at install
time - sure.  You wanna program it?

Until that time (when *everything* is configurable at install time), issues
like this will have to be dealt with by a competent System Administrator.
there simply is no other logical way to look at it.

Charles


---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.